Today on February 21, 2019, The transcript of testimony of FBI Lawyer was released to the public, the FBI lawyer who lead the FBIs investigation into Hillary Clinton's Email scandal revealed in his testimony that he recommended charges to be brought upon Hillary Clinton in 2016 to then FBI Director James Comey who was a Obama appointee, and James Comey talked him out of it and refused the recommendation of the FBI lawyer who handled the investigation against Hillary.

From the Liberal leaning the Hill Newspaper:

FBI’s top lawyer believed Hillary Clinton should face charges, but was talked out of it

February 20, 2019 - 08:10 PM EST

For most of the past three years, the FBI has tried to portray its top leadership as united behind ex-Director James Comey's decision not to pursue criminal charges against Hillary Clinton for transmitting classified information over her insecure, private email server.

Although in the end that may have been the case, we now are learning that Comey's top lawyer, then-FBI General Counsel James Baker, initially believed Clinton deserved to face criminal charges, but was talked out of it "pretty late in the process."

The revelation is contained in testimony Baker gave to House investigators last year. His testimony has not been publicly released, but I was permitted to review a transcript.

During questioning by Rep. John Ratcliffe (R-Texas), Baker was unequivocal about his early view that Clinton should face criminal charges.

His boss, Comey, announced on July 5, 2016, that he would not recommend criminal charges. He did so without consulting the Department of Justice (DOJ), a decision the department's inspector general (IG) later concluded was misguided and likely usurped the power of the attorney general to make prosecutorial decisions. Comey has said, in retrospect, he accepts that finding but took the actions he did because he thought "they were in the country's best interest."

Baker acknowledged that during the weeks leading up to the announcement, Comey "would throw things out like that to get people to start talking and thinking about it and test his conclusions."

Baker said that if he had been more convinced there was evidence that Clinton intended to violate the law, "I would have argued that vociferously with him (Comey) and maybe changed his view."

He portrayed his former boss as someone who was open to changing his mind once he heard from his senior staff, even after drafting his announcement statement. "I think he would have been receptive to changing his view even after he wrote that thing," Baker said.

Baker's account also shed light on revelations I first reported more than a year ago that the original draft of Comey's announcement concluded Clinton had been "grossly negligent" in handling her classified emails. That is the term in espionage statutes for criminality, but the language later was softened

Trump is been sued by 16 states against his fake emergency at the border, two former FBI's have exposed his radical behavior, his personal lawyer Cohen is scheduled to appear in front of congress publicly to testify against Trump and his crooked tactics during his campaign of 2016 election..

A good example of an "ad hominem" fallacy was by the Nazis who argued that Einstein's theories must be wrong since he is Jewish. Lets not be distracted by such fallacies but rather scrutinize the contents of the arguments made by all authors.

And the truth is the truth, ad hominem or not. Google John Solomon and read his Wikipedia article. Reaper the Liar begins by describing The Hill as a “Liberal leaning” publication, and then quotes from an article written by someone who makes The Federalist Society look like a liberal think tank. Intentional misrepresentation is lying. Reaper the Liar intentionally deceives. Ergo, Reaper is a Liar. Truth, ad hominem or not.

The Author is a conservative while the paper is liberal leaning. And good point z, the fake jew attack the writer instead of the content. Always dividing. When its not the color of the skin is political affiliation. Interestingly the transcript of Barrs testimony in Congress were released on the 19th of this month and they say what the writer is saying.

Ain't John Solomon a Jew? How is he a Nazi? because he write things lefties don't want to hear.

Here are the News eithers T.V or Website News outlets and their political leaning according to the Pew Research and Gallup Poll which liberals claim are accurate pollsters.

As we can see @SaremChuuk, the Hill is a liberal publication that cater towards a "Liberal" following.

Anyways here is this from a different source

Former FBI Lawyer James Baker Originally Believed Hillary Clinton Should Be ChargedBy Sara Carter - February 20, 2019

Former FBI General Counsel James Baker originally believed Hillary Clinton’s mishandling of highly classified information was “alarming” and “appalling.” At the time, he believed her use of a private server to send the classified emails was sufficient enough to secure an indictment to possibly charge her for violations under the Espionage Act, for mishandling sensitive government documents.

Baker held onto that belief until shortly before his former boss FBI Director James Comey made the public announcement not to charge Clinton on July 5, 2017. He said he changed his position only after arguing and discussing the situation over a period of time with senior colleagues at the bureau, to include Comey. Comey, however, had already written an early draft in May, exonerating Clinton and changing “grossly negligent,” a legal term for mishandling classified information to “extremely careless,” according to drafts obtained by the Senate Judiciary Committee in 2017.

A press blackout on news top FBI lawyer James Baker wanted Hillary Clinton prosecutedBy Monica ShowalterThe news is out that then-FBI director James Comey did indeed have some credible prosecutors for Hillary Clinton's mishandling of classified documents during her stint as secretary of state, passing around some of the U.S. government's most secret documents on an illegal private account attached to a server in some guy's bathroom.

"No reasonable prosecutor" would take the case, Comey intoned, who then let the former secretary of state and then-presidential candidate off the hook.

Actually, there was one, at least one, and he was sitting right next to Comey: none other than FBI general counsel James Baker, who admitted in congressional testimony that he did think Clinton's dishonest act merited prosecution.

Former FBI general counsel James Baker was reportedly “appalled” at the “highly classified” information contained on Hillary Clinton’s unsecured email server and believed she needed to be criminally prosecuted for her conduct.

In October, Baker testified before congressional committees that he and others within the FBI argued “I think, up until the end,” about whether charges against Clinton should be recommended by the bureau, Fox News reported.

“(T)he nature and scope of the classified information that, to me, initially, when I looked at it, I thought these folks should know that this stuff is classified, that it was alarming what they were talking about, especially some of the most highly classified stuff,” Baker told lawmakers

The transcript of the FBI lawyer was released yesterday and it shows that the FBI lawyer demanded and recommend thar charges be brought upon Hillary but Obama FBI director James comey said no. It was not his job to recommend prosecution or not to prosecute but James Comey did so. James Comey thought she was going to win in 2016. This was the 1st part of the insurance policy that Peter Stzrok texted about. The 2nd part was the Leaking of the Clinton campaign paid steele dossier which the Obama administration carried our days before Trump took office and the FISA warrants to spy on the Trump campaign during the election and after the elections of 2016.

Obama, Brennan And Clinton Illegally Collude To Take Trump Down

The release of the FISA application by the FBI to investigate alleged collusion between Russia and President Trump's campaign and recent comments made by top officials are eye opening.

Not only did President Obama know about the investigation, he seems to have pushed it from the very beginning.

But don't take our word for it. Here's what Obama's Director of National Intelligence, the nation's former spy master, James Clapper, told CNN's Anderson Cooper:

"If it weren't for President Obama we might not have done the intelligence community assessment that we did that set up a whole sequence of event which are still unfolding today, including Special Counsel (Robert) Mueller's investigation. President Obama is responsible for that. It was he who tasked us to do that intelligence community assessment in the first place."

Why didn't this get more attention in the media? Obama and Brennan not only knew the dubious nature of the allegations against Trump, but pushed them anyway.

As Kimberley Strassel wrote in the Wall Street Journal, Brennan in particular has revealed himself to be a total anti-Trump partisan to an extent that's shocking for a public official. His animus is raw and deep, as his actions suggest.

"The record shows (Brennan) went on to use his position — as head of the most powerful spy agency in the world — to assist Hillary Clinton's campaign (and keep his job)," Kimberley Strassel wrote last week in the Wall Street Journal